Santos v. Allen et al

Filing 73

ORDER Granting 66 Plaintiff's Motion for Clarification. Clerk to issue summons, under seal, on Defendants Mohlenkamp and Palaylay. Clerk shall deliver summons and second amended complaint to US Marshal's Service. Within 30 days of thi s order, US Marshal's Service shall attempt to serve the summons and second amended complaint on Defendants. The US Marshal's Service shall provide plaintiff with a Form USM-285 (without listing Defendants' addresses) indicating whethe r service was effected for each defendant. Plaintiff is responsible for paying the US Marshal's Service fees. Signed by Magistrate Judge Nancy J. Koppe on 10/29/2014. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - cc: USM - EDS) Modified on 10/29/2014 to correct signing judge. Regenerated NEF (EDS).

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

10
RONALD R. SANTOS,
11
12
13
14
15

)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
vs.
)
)
AWD ISIDRO BACA, et al.,
)
)
Defendants.
)
__________________________________________)

Case No. 2:11-cv-01251-KJD-NJK
ORDER
(Docket No. 66)

16

Pending before the Court is Plaintiff’s motion for clarification of prior order granting Plaintiff’s

17

motion for order to carry out service. Docket No. 66. On October 27, 2014, Defendants filed their

18

notice of non-opposition to Plaintiff’s motion for clarification. Docket No. 68. The Court finds this

19

motion properly resolved without oral argument. See Local Rule 78-2. For the reasons discussed

20

below, the Court hereby GRANTS Plaintiff’s motion for clarification of prior order granting Plaintiff’s

21

motion for order to carry out service (Docket No. 66).

22

Plaintiff, an inmate in solitary confinement, is proceeding in this action pro se, but not in forma

23

pauperis. On May 24, 2013, the Court entered an order directing Plaintiff to make arrangements to serve

24

the remaining defendants for whom the Attorney General did not accept service. Docket No. 22, at 1.

25

Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(c)(3), “[a]t the plaintiff's request, the court may order that

26

service be made by a United States marshal.”

27

On August 27, 2014, the Court granted Plaintiff’s motion for an order to carry out service.

28

Docket No. 48. The Court directed the U.S. Marshals Service (“USMS”) to attempt to serve the

1

summons and Second Amended Complaint on the following Defendants: Schaff, Scilia, Camacho,

2

Carbajal, Ferguson, and Skolnik. Id., at 2-3. The Court also ordered the Clerk of the Court to issue a

3

subpoena duces tecum to the Custodian of Records at the Nevada Department of Administration

4

directing the custodian to provide the last-known address of Defendant Jeffrey Mohlenkamp. Id., at 3.

5

The Court directed the USMS to attempt to serve the summons and Second Amended Complaint on

6

Mohlenkamp once his last-known address was received by the Clerk of the Court. Id., at 3-4. Finally,

7

the Court ordered Defendants to file, under seal, the last-known address of Defendant Palaylay. Id., at

8

4.

9

Plaintiff represents that, as of October 7, 2014, he has only received two invoices from the

10

USMS. Docket No. 66, at 2. The USMS served the following Defendants: Schaff (Docket No. 62),

11

Scilia (Docket No. 57), and Ferguson (Docket No. 58). The USMS was not able to serve the following

12

Defendants: Camacho (Docket No. 65), Carbajal (Docket No. 56), Skolnik (Docket No. 53), and

13

Mohlenkamp (Docket No. 67).1

14

Based upon the foregoing,

15

IT IS SO ORDERED:

16

1.

17

The Clerk of the Court shall use the information provided by the USMS, under seal, in
Docket No. 67, to issue summons on Defendant Mohlenkamp.

18

2.

19

The Clerk of the Court shall use the information provided by Defendants, under seal, in
Docket No. 54, to issue summons on Defendant Palaylay.

20

3.

21

The Clerk of the Court shall deliver the summons for Defendants Mohlenkamp and
Palaylay and the Second Amended Complaint to the USMS.

22

4.

Within thirty days of this Order, the USMS shall attempt to serve the summons and

23

Second Amended Complaint on Defendants Mohlenkamp and Palaylay. The USMS

24

shall provide Plaintiff with a Form USM-285 (without listing Defendants’ addresses)

25

indicating whether service was effected for each Defendant.

26
27
28

1

The unexecuted summons, filed under seal, states Defendant Mohlenkamp’s new address.
Docket No. 67, at 3.
-2-

1

5.

If the USMS is unable to serve Defendants Mohlenkamp and Palaylay, and Plaintiff

2

wishes to have service again attempted, a motion shall be filed with the Court specifying

3

a more detailed name and/or address for said defendant, or whether some other manner

4

of service should be attempted.

5

6.

If Plaintiff wishes to have service again attempted on Defendants Camacho, Carbajal,

6

and Skolnik, a motion shall be filed with the Court specifying a more detailed name

7

and/or address for said defendant, or whether some other manner of service should be

8

attempted.

9

7.

10
11
12
13

Plaintiff shall file the Forms USM-285 within ten days after receiving them from the
USMS.

8.

Plaintiff is responsible for paying the USMS the fees for service of process on all
Defendants.

Dated: October 29, 2014

14
15

___________________________________
Nancy J. Koppe
United States Magistrate Judge

16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-3-